Official 2007-08 College Basketball Thread

[whitesoxfan101]

Devin Ebanks is the guy, no f***ing clue why I said Delvon Roe, sorry.

[SleepyWhiteSox]

Couple of notes nobody probably cares to hear about but me...

 

DePaul opener @ creighton will be shown on CLTV, Nov. 9th. NOT the opponent I want to open up with since we've started very slow under Coach Wainwright and we're young this year, but I'm still excited for the college hoops season to begin.

 

Also, Mac Koshwal is the first freshman to be named a captain in DePaul history. Can't wait to see all the new guys play.

 

[Kyyle23]

Has the NCAA said anything regarding these infractions yet? Or is Indiana trying to stem the tide before the crap hits the fan?

 

I just wonder why Sampson is able to repeatedly skate on these infractions if he keeps getting busted for the same thing over and over?

 

FWIW, Im looking at this as an outsider. I havent read into it too much, but it has gotten so much airplay recently that i am starting to become curious about what is really going on here.

[greasywheels121]

We're still waiting for the NCAA's decision on how they will come down on IU. This isn't going under the rug, nor should it.

[Kyyle23]

We're still waiting for the NCAA's decision on how they will come down on IU. This isn't going under the rug, nor should it.

 

How does the IU faithful think this is gonna turn out? Do you think that Sampson might get off easy because of the assistant resigning(ie. taking the bullet)?

[greasywheels121]

Personally, I don't think this has any effect on anything. This doesn't make things any better or worse; this was all bad to begin with.

 

Senderoff was the fall guy, as his name was linked to the calls in the initial reports. However, this doesn't do anything to better the situation.

 

Senderoff's position was barred from making any recruiting calls or visits, and I question if he did anything outside of that for the program. And if he didn't, he was basically worthless to the program, in his current role, since he couldn't do anything. And FWIW, the sanctions imposed on Senderoff's position will remain on whoever takes his position (it looks to be Dan Dakich).

[thedoctor]

How does the IU faithful think this is gonna turn out? Do you think that Sampson might get off easy because of the assistant resigning(ie. taking the bullet)?

 

personally, the only fallout i see happening is perhaps some damaged recruiting relationships with some of the east coast kids senderoff was after. from what i've read, he was the lead recruiter on ebanks, lance stephenson, and a few others. so, possibly there are issues there.

 

otherwise, i don't really expect much. the ncaa isn't quite as punitive as it used to be, so i don't expect a severe punishment. a worst-case would probably be a postseason ban next year.

[Rex Hudler]

Has the NCAA said anything regarding these infractions yet? Or is Indiana trying to stem the tide before the crap hits the fan?

 

I just wonder why Sampson is able to repeatedly skate on these infractions if he keeps getting busted for the same thing over and over?

 

FWIW, Im looking at this as an outsider. I havent read into it too much, but it has gotten so much airplay recently that i am starting to become curious about what is really going on here.

 

Kelvin Sampson did not commit any NCAA infractions. Rob Senderoff, who resigned today, did. Sampson is tied to between 10-18 "3-way calls" (the # depends on how you count them) that are not NCAA violations, but were impermissable under the sanctions he was under from his deal at Oklahoma.

 

People can trash IU, Sampson, me, whoever they want, but I feel I can objectively say that if there were only between 10-18 issues where a call came and and it was patched through to Sampson (he did not make the calls) then it is a matter of carelessness. If he truly felt "above the law" or felt he wouldn't have gotten caught, then it sure as hell would happen a heckuva lot more than 10-18 times in 365 days!!

 

Granted, perfection is expected with the previous issues, which is why he got smacked. But to act as if this is an act of blatant cheating is comical to me.

 

s***, if you asked me for details on 10+ phone calls over the past year when I take thousands, I'd have no freakin clue of any details. Yet everyone expects Sampson to remember each in detail like they were yesterday.

 

And for those of you not aware, it is about normal for a Division I NCAA school to self-report 40-50 secondary violations (which Senderoff's are) per year. Secondary violations are a common occurrence. Not that matters with the IU case, but it helps illustrate that all schools have issues like this. Not all have a coach being sanctioned for prior offenses I know. But very few of these secondary violations ever hit the news because they are commonplace.

[Rex Hudler]

personally, the only fallout i see happening is perhaps some damaged recruiting relationships with some of the east coast kids senderoff was after. from what i've read, he was the lead recruiter on ebanks, lance stephenson, and a few others. so, possibly there are issues there.

 

otherwise, i don't really expect much. the ncaa isn't quite as punitive as it used to be, so i don't expect a severe punishment. a worst-case would probably be a postseason ban next year.

 

There will be no post-season ban. This stuff just isn't that large enough to warrant anything close to that. If anything, they may restrict Sampson even further.

[Buehrle>Wood]

Kelvin Sampson did not commit any NCAA infractions. Rob Senderoff, who resigned today, did. Sampson is tied to between 10-18 "3-way calls" (the # depends on how you count them) that are not NCAA violations, but were impermissable under the sanctions he was under from his deal at Oklahoma.

Which would be the rules that the NCAA laid out for him, hense he committed NCAA infractions.

[Rex Hudler]

Which would be the rules that the NCAA laid out for him, hense he committed NCAA infractions.

 

nope, not the same thing.......... stretch it how you want, but Sampson's actions were not NCAA rules violations. All other coaches are allowed to do what he did. He violated personal sanctions placed on him. There is a difference. If you don't get it ask the lawyers who did the investigation and the school why they had to do two separate reports to turn over to the NCAA. It's because they aren't the same. Try and keep up, will ya?

[Heads22]

If only Lucca Staiger only made illegal phone calls and wasn't foreign.

[Buehrle>Wood]

nope, not the same thing.......... stretch it how you want, but Sampson's actions were not NCAA rules violations. All other coaches are allowed to do what he did. He violated personal sanctions placed on him. There is a difference. If you don't get it ask the lawyers who did the investigation and the school why they had to do two separate reports to turn over to the NCAA. It's because they aren't the same. Try and keep up, will ya?

That's great and all, but he still broke the rules given to him by the NCAA. Who the hell cares what you call it.

[thedoctor]

There will be no post-season ban. This stuff just isn't that large enough to warrant anything close to that. If anything, they may restrict Sampson even further.

 

keep in mind, i said worst-case scenario. all anyone knows at this point is what iu has reported to the ncaa in this matter. on that point, i'd agree that the violations as reported to the ncaa would not merit any ban. however, since the ncaa has not concluded its investigation, it's presumptive to say what they will or won't find.

[Jenksismyhero]

nope, not the same thing.......... stretch it how you want, but Sampson's actions were not NCAA rules violations. All other coaches are allowed to do what he did. He violated personal sanctions placed on him. There is a difference. If you don't get it ask the lawyers who did the investigation and the school why they had to do two separate reports to turn over to the NCAA. It's because they aren't the same. Try and keep up, will ya?

 

 

No offense man, but you need to look through your love of IU and see what this is. Samscum is dirty - he's been dirty for years. You can call this a "secondary violation" if you want, but the fact is Samscum broke a "secondary violation" twice... in two years. How can you stick up for a guy who specifically says things like "I will never make impermissible calls again...this is the last time...no more" and then watch him as he lies his way out of BREAKING THE SAME RULE. They were trying to get around the technical rules of making calls. So Samscum can't call recruits - ok, have an asst call a recruit and then call Samscum on a 3-way. TECHNICALLY Samscum didn't dial the phone number, so its fine. But not only is this arguable (that he didn't make calls), it also totally skirts the purpose of the rule. How can you stick up for an institution that implements a "zero-tolerance" policy without coming down hard on him? And don't give me crap about their self-imposed sanctions - they don't hurt anyone, including Samscum or the program.

 

I agree its a minimal infraction, but taken in context, when the guy has already been caught for it, he's essentially spitting the NCAA's face with this. They won't do anything because Brand has the balls of a chipmunk, but I hope Samscum gets raped in the press for getting away with it. Coaches are supposed to be role models - what kind of role model teaches that purposefully breaking rules is ok?

[Soxbadger]

Rex,

 

Lets look at a similar real world example.

 

If you are convicted, you some times are given a second chance called parole. Part of your parole is that you have terms that you have to follow, such as checking in with your Parole officer on X day at X time, or taking a mandatory alcohol/ drug test, there also could be job restrictions etc.

 

None of these rules apply to a regular citizen, but if you are parole, they apply to you. And Im pretty sure that if you blatantly violate your parole 18 times or so, the govt would not take the excuse:

 

"Well every other citizen doesnt even have to follow those rules"

 

Well no, the reason why you have those rules is because you broke other rules in the first place. Had you always followed the rules, then there would be no problem. But Sampson has violated the rules, and then was given a new set of rules so that he could still coach, he once again violated them. Even worse is in the real world we have respondeat superior, in which the master is liable for the torts of the servant. Sampson should be responsible for what the staff below him does, in the end he is the one that is accountable. If you let Sampson off the hook because it was one of his servants, than all it does is set the precedent for creating a fall guy. Every coach will hire an assistant to bend as many rules as possible, and then play dumb when the NCAA comes calling.

 

Hope for Indiana that they have the cache to make the NCAA not really devastate Indiana, because I think that would be the only way to send a message to guys like Sampson.

 

0 calls is permissible, not 1, not 2, not 10, not 18, 0.

 

And I dont buy the argument that if he really was breaking the rules he would have just done it blatantly and much more often. Thats not how criminals act, thats not how rule breakers act, they break the rules only when it is necessary, so those 18 or so calls were probably the most necessary times to do it. Not to mention, what number is exactly a number that isnt just a mistake?

 

To me that number is 1, maybe I could give him 1 mistake. But 18? You might as well have 50 mistakes, 100 mistakes, because really whats in a number.

Edited October 31, 2007 by Soxbadger

[Rex Hudler]

Rex,

 

Lets look at a similar real world example.

 

If you are convicted, you some times are given a second chance called parole. Part of your parole is that you have terms that you have to follow, such as checking in with your Parole officer on X day at X time, or taking a mandatory alcohol/ drug test, there also could be job restrictions etc.

 

None of these rules apply to a regular citizen, but if you are parole, they apply to you. And Im pretty sure that if you blatantly violate your parole 18 times or so, the govt would not take the excuse:

 

"Well every other citizen doesnt even have to follow those rules"

 

Well no, the reason why you have those rules is because you broke other rules in the first place. Had you always followed the rules, then there would be no problem. But Sampson has violated the rules, and then was given a new set of rules so that he could still coach, he once again violated them. Even worse is in the real world we have respondeat superior, in which the master is liable for the torts of the servant. Sampson should be responsible for what the staff below him does, in the end he is the one that is accountable. If you let Sampson off the hook because it was one of his servants, than all it does is set the precedent for creating a fall guy. Every coach will hire an assistant to bend as many rules as possible, and then play dumb when the NCAA comes calling.

 

Hope for Indiana that they have the cache to make the NCAA not really devastate Indiana, because I think that would be the only way to send a message to guys like Sampson.

 

0 calls is permissible, not 1, not 2, not 10, not 18, 0.

 

And I dont buy the argument that if he really was breaking the rules he would have just done it blatantly and much more often. Thats not how criminals act, thats not how rule breakers act, they break the rules only when it is necessary, so those 18 or so calls were probably the most necessary times to do it. Not to mention, what number is exactly a number that isnt just a mistake?

 

To me that number is 1, maybe I could give him 1 mistake. But 18? You might as well have 50 mistakes, 100 mistakes, because really whats in a number.

 

Badger, thanks for an intelligent, rational argument. I don't fully disagree with you, but see things a bit differently.

 

We could take a look at a more realistic real world example since he did not commit a crime and was not on parole. Let's say he got into trouble at work and was written up and disciplined. He slipped up again and the company decided to discipline him further rather than terminate him. That happens in the real world every day.

 

To say Sampson is getting off the hook is not accurate. This mistake cost him a half million dollars. It cost him a valued assistant coach. It limits his program because he now has a new assistant coach with restrictions that cannot make calls or recruit off campus for a year. So not only was he hurt financially, he is working with more restrictions than other teams, making it more difficult for him to do his job.

 

If any of you have actually read what I originally typed about this, you would know that I am not condoning what he did. He got punished and deserved it. Like I said, I have read the reports and understand more than just what the average internet reader gets by reading a columnist spewing out half-truths. Pardon me if I don't think that every crime is equal. If an employee is habitually late, you deal with it. But you also deal with him differently than someone that doesn't show up at all, and differently than someone that is insubordinate.

 

I'm not happy about this whole situation, but forgive me if I don't want to give the guy the death penalty for petty theft (not sure that is a perfect analogy, but hopefully you get the point rather than honing in on my crime of choice). I will stop wasting my "breath" with this because I can't win. I don't to win either. I would just think some people could be objective enough to realize this isn't a capital crime. One can argue that a petty thief will become a murderer in time, but I think that you have to wait until that happens rather than sending the petty thief away for life.

 

At this point, I will refrain from responding to anything relating to this topic. It's time for basketball season and to focus on on the court happenings. I think I shall do that from this point on.

Edited November 1, 2007 by Rex Hudler

[Rex Hudler]

No offense man, but you need to look through your love of IU and see what this is. Samscum is dirty - he's been dirty for years.

 

I stopped reading right there. I would have an intelligent debate about this but obviously you are incapable of doing so. I find it funny that I need to past my love of IU yet you bring such objective terms as Samscum and frivolous "dirty for years" accusations.

 

At this point, I don't feel the need to comment further, whether intelligent debates or not.

 

Let's the games begin!!

[Felix]

First game of the season is tomorrow night. f*** yeah!

[hitlesswonder]

I stopped reading right there. I would have an intelligent debate about this but obviously you are incapable of doing so. I find it funny that I need to past my love of IU yet you bring such objective terms as Samscum and frivolous "dirty for years" accusations.

 

I agree with Rex -- this is a tempest in a teapot. The assistant coach (who has been dismissed) committed the infractions, not Sampson. And seriously, what's the big deal about a few phone calls? Is that worse than keeping a felon on a team in order to land recruit who happens to be a friend of his? I don't think so -- but it's certainly true one is against the NCAA rules and the other isn't. I think everyone expecting the NCAA to do something big here will be very disappointed. At most it will be further phone restrictions.

 

[Jenksismyhero]

I stopped reading right there. I would have an intelligent debate about this but obviously you are incapable of doing so. I find it funny that I need to past my love of IU yet you bring such objective terms as Samscum and frivolous "dirty for years" accusations.

 

At this point, I don't feel the need to comment further, whether intelligent debates or not.

 

Let's the games begin!!

 

 

To each his own I suppose. Samscum might have been over the top, but "dirty for years" is entirely accurate.

[thedoctor]

illinois won it's exhibition opener last night over quincy 82-61. it was 48-16 at halftime, and shaun pruitt, chester frazier, and calvin brock did not play.

 

leading scorer and rebounder was freshman mike davis with 13 and nine. he was followed by freshman bill cole with 11 and eight. there will be some difficult redshirt decisions with these guys and tisdale upcoming.

[Buehrle>Wood]

illinois won it's exhibition opener last night over quincy 82-61. it was 48-16 at halftime, and shaun pruitt, chester frazier, and calvin brock did not play.

 

leading scorer and rebounder was freshman mike davis with 13 and nine. he was followed by freshman bill cole with 11 and eight. there will be some difficult redshirt decisions with these guys and tisdale upcoming.

 

I would say Cole. They got what, 16 players on the roster? Someone needs to redshirt. With Davis, there's a chance he won't be there all 4 years with his athleticism so I don't think it's him. 2010-11 is going to be their next very good year, and they could use an upperclassman PF. Carwell probably deserves the redshirt, but then you lose a 2010 precious schollie so I think he's out.

[fathom]

Any truth to Pruitt being out due to disciplinary issues?

[Buehrle>Wood]

Any truth to Pruitt being out due to disciplinary issues?

 

Pretty sure it was just a coach's decision. Brock I heard had the flu, but who knows.